4 ms·

I disagree. "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. The TSL actually lets you do a lot -

I disagree. "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. The TSL actually lets you do a lot - almost anything, really. It's an open source license (I even used little o's!) that is designed to only prevent cloud providers from selling TimescaleDB as a service.

cercatrova 6y ago
Then you could call it a permissive source available license, or other such verbiage. There's no need to continue to call it "open source in spirit."
- scj 6y ago
  "The usage of pork broth in an otherwise vegetarian dish is vegetarian in spirit." I can't help but wonder if they're using the phrase "open source in spirit" to leech the branding of open source (while ironically treating other companies as leeches).
  - cercatrova 6y ago
    That's exactly why they're doing it. They want to have their cake and eat it too.
lmm 6y ago
> I disagree. "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. It doesn't really - it's been used to describe a pretty broad range of licenses. "Source available" means you can read the source but do not have all of the rights you'd get from an open source license. Which is the case for TSL.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. The established meaning is “any non-F/OSS licenses that nevertheless provides free access to source code, which may or may not also provide some usage rights” TSL is exactly that. There might be some utility to a name for a new subcategory of source available, but it's not meaningfully similar to open source since it remains, ultimately, a traditional, rent-protection proprietary license. The fact that current market conditions give a very particular rent-extracting opportunity that the vendor wants to protect and the vendor focussed rent protection where the most value is...is not unusual, even if the exact current valuable rent-extraction opportunity is different than it was even a few years ago.

cercatrova 6y ago

Then you could call it a permissive source available license, or other such verbiage. There's no need to continue to call it "open source in spirit."

scj 6y ago
"The usage of pork broth in an otherwise vegetarian dish is vegetarian in spirit." I can't help but wonder if they're using the phrase "open source in spirit" to leech the branding of open source (while ironically treating other companies as leeches).
- cercatrova 6y ago
  That's exactly why they're doing it. They want to have their cake and eat it too.

lmm 6y ago

> I disagree. "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. It doesn't really - it's been used to describe a pretty broad range of licenses. "Source available" means you can read the source but do not have all of the rights you'd get from an open source license. Which is the case for TSL.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> "source available" already has a long established meaning, and one that it far more restrictive than the TSL. The established meaning is “any non-F/OSS licenses that nevertheless provides free access to source code, which may or may not also provide some usage rights” TSL is exactly that. There might be some utility to a name for a new subcategory of source available, but it's not meaningfully similar to open source since it remains, ultimately, a traditional, rent-protection proprietary license. The fact that current market conditions give a very particular rent-extracting opportunity that the vendor wants to protect and the vendor focussed rent protection where the most value is...is not unusual, even if the exact current valuable rent-extraction opportunity is different than it was even a few years ago.